IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/lawarx/3pyku.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The codetermination bargains: the history of German corporate and labour law

Author

Listed:
  • McGaughey, Ewan

    (King's College, London)

Abstract

Why does codetermination exist in Germany? Law and economics theories have contended that if there were no legal compulsion, worker participation in corporate governance would be ‘virtually nonexistent’. This positive analysis, which flows from the ‘nexus of contracts’ conception of the corporation, supports a normative argument that codetermination is inefficient because it is supposed it will seldom happen voluntarily. After discussing competing conceptions of the corporation, as a ‘thing in itself’, and as an ‘institution’, this article explores the development of German codetermination from the mid-19th century to the present. It finds the inefficiency argument sits at odds with the historical evidence. In its very inception, the right of workers to vote for a company board of directors, or in work councils with a voice in dismissals, came from collective agreements. It was not compelled by law, but was collectively bargained between business and labour representatives. These ‘codetermination bargains’ were widespread. Laws then codified these models. This was true at the foundation of the Weimar Republic from 1918 to 1922 and, after abolition in 1933, again from 1945 to 1951. The foundational codetermination bargains were made because of two ‘Goldilocks’ conditions (conditions that were ‘just right’) which were not always seen in countries like the UK or US. First, inequality of bargaining power between workers and employers was temporarily less pronounced. Second, the trade union movement became united in the objective of seeking worker voice in corporate governance. As the practice of codetermination has been embraced by a majority of EU countries, and continues to develop, it is important to have an accurate positive narrative of codetermination’s economic and political foundations. (2016) 23(1) Columbia Journal of European Law 135.

Suggested Citation

  • McGaughey, Ewan, 2016. "The codetermination bargains: the history of German corporate and labour law," LawArXiv 3pyku, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:lawarx:3pyku
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/3pyku
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5dcaba058f0e5e000ad2df29/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/3pyku?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Steven Rosefielde, 2020. "Stakeholder Capitalism: Progressive Dream or Nightmare?," Book chapters-LUMEN Proceedings, in: Adriana Grigorescu & Valentin Radu (ed.), 1st International Conference Global Ethics - Key of Sustainability (GEKoS), edition 1, volume 11, chapter 3, pages 14-23, Editura Lumen.
    2. Simon Jäger & Benjamin Schoefer & Jörg Heining, 2021. "Labor in the Boardroom," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(2), pages 669-725.
    3. Simon Jäger & Shakked Noy & Benjamin Schoefer, 2022. "What Does Codetermination Do?," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(4), pages 857-890, August.
    4. Emilio Carnevali & André Pedersen Ystehede, 2023. "Is socialism back? A review of contemporary economic literature," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 239-270, April.
    5. Cristi A. Gleason & Sascha Kieback & Martin Thomsen & Christoph Watrin, 2021. "Monitoring or payroll maximization? What happens when workers enter the boardroom?," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 1046-1087, September.
    6. Andrew Smith & Kevin Tennent & Jason Russell, 2022. "The rejection of industrial democracy by Berle and Means and the emergence of the ideology of managerialism," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 43(1), pages 98-122, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:lawarx:3pyku. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/lawarxiv/discover .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.